Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Announcing Docker ToolBox

blog.docker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 73 posts

Re: Announcing Docker ToolBox

#61

Post by shykes »

vincentriemer wrote: post #43
FlyingSnake wrote: post #6

Sadly no support for Parallels.

The docker team completely ignored the great work the parallels team put into creating a parallels driver instead telling them to wait for the plugin architecture to be finished. Reference: https://github.com/docker/machine/pull/939

It was a tough decision, and "completely ignored" is an unfair way to put it.

The Machine maintainers are overwhelmed by pull requests adding new drivers. They are worried about maintenance load, and its impact on the quality of drivers over time. So instead of making promises they can't deliver on, they're investing the time on a plugin architecture, so that everyone can create and add their own drivers without depending on the bottleneck that is the core maintainers.

Re: Announcing Docker ToolBox

#62

Post by zenlikethat »

SloopJon wrote: post #52
macmac wrote: post #37

Does anyone have any idea how to get the Docker Quickstart Terminal app to use iterm2/zsh instead of Terminal/bsh?

If you look at the contents of the .app, you can edit main.scpt in AppleScript Editor, but it's really just doing two things, creating the VM if necessary: docker-machine create -d virtualbox --virtualbox-memory 2048 default and populating environment variables for docker: eval $(docker-machine env default) Passing --shell zsh to docker-machine env doesn't seem to change its output. Does zsh understand commands like…

Yep, `docker-machine env` should work fine in zsh (I am a daily zsh and docker-machine user).

Re: Announcing Docker ToolBox

#63

Post by sharksandwich »

frostmatthew wrote: post #36
alcidesfonseca wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has anyone tried VMWare fusion to run a Docker host VM? Virtualbox shared folders are unusable for my purpose (compiling software on Linux).

> Has anyone tried VMWare fusion to run a Docker host VM? If you're considering Fusion I'd suggest taking a look at AppCatalyst[1] instead (N.B. I work at VMware, but not on AppCatalyst). [1] http://blogs.vmware.com/cloudnative/vmware-appcatalyst/

looks great, but doesn't have a docker-machine driver yet

https://github.com/docker/machine/pull/1401

Re: Announcing Docker ToolBox

#64

Post by curun1r »

frostmatthew wrote: post #36
alcidesfonseca wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has anyone tried VMWare fusion to run a Docker host VM? Virtualbox shared folders are unusable for my purpose (compiling software on Linux).

> Has anyone tried VMWare fusion to run a Docker host VM? If you're considering Fusion I'd suggest taking a look at AppCatalyst[1] instead (N.B. I work at VMware, but not on AppCatalyst). [1] http://blogs.vmware.com/cloudnative/vmware-appcatalyst/

Is there a good way to connect with the developers working on appcatalyst? It seems really promising but it also seems like there are fundamental parts of the developer workflow that are either not implemented yet or poorly documented. Having put up with the hassles of VirtualBox when using boot2docker, a free/low-cost VMWare option is a really great development, but it doesn't seem entirely usable yet and needs some of the layer that Boot2Docker gives you on top of VirtualBox before it will be possible to switch.

Re: Announcing Docker ToolBox

#65

Post by girvo »

nickstinemates wrote: post #57
girvo wrote: post #3

Nice one. However, VirtualBox's shared-folder support is so god-awfully slow, that here at work we all swapped out the regular boot2docker setup for boot2docker-xhyve[0] which is so much faster at nearly everything that it's not even a comparison. Now, with ailispaw's dockeroot-xhyve you can even get a VM root image that can be grown on the fly, so you never run out of space on your VM when building large Docker imag…

> In addition, I'd never recommend Docker Compose to web developers that rely on databases, as quirks with it have caused many a volume-only container to be destroyed and rebuilt, thus defeating the purpose. Can you point me in the direction of a bug report or a more concrete example? I'd like to make sure we follow up.

Some of it is insurmountable without having some way of marking a container in the docker-compose.yml as "never destroy this!". It's a UX thing more than a bug, although there was two cases where "docker-compose up" destroyed and rebuilt a volume-only container that was in the docker-compose.yml -- unfortunately it was difficult to replicate so we didn't send a bug report through. The big thing is that using it on OSX with boot2docker means the cache can get confused, and so to get it to pick up config file changes (say, changes to an nginx config that are brought into the container) or some Dockerfile changes requires a "docker-compose rm && docker-compose build --no-cache", which of course will delete the volume-only container unless you're aware enough of the need to name the container you want to rebuild; as I said, it's more a UX issue than a bug, in my opinion.

In terms of fixes, ideally I'd like to see a way of marking a container as "volume-only" -- this would then mean a "docker-compose rm" would not remove it, and "docker-compose up" would never rebuild it.

Re: Announcing Docker ToolBox

#66

Post by scprodigy »

elvis635 wrote: post #9
girvo wrote: post #3

Nice one. However, VirtualBox's shared-folder support is so god-awfully slow, that here at work we all swapped out the regular boot2docker setup for boot2docker-xhyve[0] which is so much faster at nearly everything that it's not even a comparison. Now, with ailispaw's dockeroot-xhyve you can even get a VM root image that can be grown on the fly, so you never run out of space on your VM when building large Docker imag…

Docker under OSX is a real pain to solve ASAP. I've set Docker on my Linux machine and it's working like a charm. Then I had to do the same for my coworkers running OSX, the vbox shared folders are definitely unusable. Now it's been few days that I'm trying to find the best way to have a two-way sync in order to sync back changes from docker to the OSX folder (eg. when you upload a file and it's saved in the /public…

Try Hyper on Mac: https://hyper.sh/blog/post/2015/07/30/running-containers-fro...

Re: Announcing Docker ToolBox

#67

Post by nogox »

shykes wrote: post #60

Hi all. We know the experience of using Docker on OSX is not perfect today. The default virtualbox configuration for file sharing is slow and buggy. You need to use 3 different CLIs (`docker`, `docker-machine`, `docker-compose`) which are not well integrated. 3d-party clients need to reimplement everything themselves. The standard clients are not configurable or customizable enough. We plan on solving all of this. Th…

Hi Solomon,

It is great to hear you guys are working on that. I find Hyper is pretty interesting to run Docker on Mac https://hyper.sh/blog/post/2015/07/30/running-containers-fro....

Re: Announcing Docker ToolBox

#68

Post by frapposelli »

curun1r wrote: post #64
frostmatthew wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Has anyone tried VMWare fusion to run a Docker host VM? If you're considering Fusion I'd suggest taking a look at AppCatalyst[1] instead (N.B. I work at VMware, but not on AppCatalyst). [1] http://blogs.vmware.com/cloudnative/vmware-appcatalyst/

Is there a good way to connect with the developers working on appcatalyst? It seems really promising but it also seems like there are fundamental parts of the developer workflow that are either not implemented yet or poorly documented. Having put up with the hassles of VirtualBox when using boot2docker, a free/low-cost VMWare option is a really great development, but it doesn't seem entirely usable yet and needs some…

I'm part of the dev team that is responsible for appcatalyst, feel free to reach out: fabio at vmware dot com

Re: Announcing Docker ToolBox

#69

Post by frapposelli »

sharksandwich wrote: post #63
frostmatthew wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Has anyone tried VMWare fusion to run a Docker host VM? If you're considering Fusion I'd suggest taking a look at AppCatalyst[1] instead (N.B. I work at VMware, but not on AppCatalyst). [1] http://blogs.vmware.com/cloudnative/vmware-appcatalyst/

looks great, but doesn't have a docker-machine driver yet https://github.com/docker/machine/pull/1401

My branch is in working order, you can build and use it with appcatalyst: https://github.com/frapposelli/machine/tree/appcatalyst-driv...

Re: Announcing Docker ToolBox

#70

Post by shykes »

nogox wrote: post #67
shykes wrote: post #60

Hi all. We know the experience of using Docker on OSX is not perfect today. The default virtualbox configuration for file sharing is slow and buggy. You need to use 3 different CLIs (`docker`, `docker-machine`, `docker-compose`) which are not well integrated. 3d-party clients need to reimplement everything themselves. The standard clients are not configurable or customizable enough. We plan on solving all of this. Th…

Hi Solomon, It is great to hear you guys are working on that. I find Hyper is pretty interesting to run Docker on Mac https://hyper.sh/blog/post/2015/07/30/running-containers-fro... .

I think Hyper is interesting as a backend for Docker in production use cases where you need to extra isolation of VMs... But in development in doesn't make much sense to run each container in a separate VM. So I'm not convinced we need this extra layer of abstraction.
Post reply on HN